Skiing vs cycling

[Wobblers]

McWobble, it was always transparent that Eurosafe are an NGO concerned with influencing policy. The fact that they influenced the Guardian article was always my point. I highlighted their claims not to support them, not to go into the quality of their research but to point out, they have some kind of influence and that their claims are in contradiction to the consensus within this forum. I personally believe they are writing in good faith in so far as I don't believe they are dishonest. Their reference may refer to articles that are not ultimately peer reviewed research at core. Or they might be - I don't think either of us can quite work that one out.
The point is, people looking at the bodies sponsors will see a diversity of institutions and ascribe some credibility to their policy documents. Separately, I don't think you would disagree with all the policies they propose.

@swansonj engaged with the question in my post and I thank him for that insight.

I don't like the stridency you have that takes this discussion back into the details of the helmet debate all the time.

I stated my position on that clearly - we all have some bias but I was honest enough to state the emotional content of it.

Let's be clear, the thing I object to in these debates is the inability to talk about anything regarding this subject without trying to place someone in a particular camp. That stinks.

Again you've chosen to ignore what I said and misrepresent me. I expect that they are working in good faith - and I have not claimed otherwise. But that matters little if they do not use all the information available to them. Their conclusions that you highlighted are not based on the scientific evidence (look at Goldacre's paper if you don't believe me). This is now the third time I've pointed this out to you. You have yet to answer it. Nor did you reply to either srw's or swansonj's thoughtful posts. Believe it or not, I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts.

What you have done is call me "strident" three times now. For someone who's expressed a wish for this not to degenerate into "another sniping match", this seems rather odd behaviour, as does the deliberate ignoring of other peoples' arguments: it all but guarantees bad faith. I'm perfectly happy to discuss facts, and indeed opinions. Lazy smears and insinuations are not on.

Incidentally, you are also putting me in a particular camp. I've not done so with you, not indeed Eurosafe. I've merely pointed out troubling deficiencies in their conclusions. (I haven't commented about the skiiing side of things because I know far too little to make a meaningful contribution.)

 

[Wobblers]

[QUOTE 2859494, member: 1314"]I don't think MacW has been strident - he has been rational, thoughtful and engaged.

thom came in with a post not thought through confirming her fixed viewpoints, and despite MacW's post above, has gone back to confirming MacW to be strident.

Why is thom being thus? Thereby hangs the tale ladies and gents, thereby hangs the tale.[/quote]

Ahem. Thom's a 6 foot plus chap who's depressingly fast onna bike [1]. Just thought I should make that clear...

[1] Who, slow old me bitter? Nah...

 

[thom]

Again you've chosen to ignore what I said and misrepresent me. I expect that they are working in good faith - and I have not claimed otherwise. But that matters little if they do not use all the information available to them. Their conclusions that you highlighted are not based on the scientific evidence (look at Goldacre's paper if you don't believe me). This is now the third time I've pointed this out to you. You have yet to answer it. Nor did you reply to either srw's or swansonj's thoughtful posts. Believe it or not, I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts.

What you have done is call me "strident" three times now. For someone who's expressed a wish for this not to degenerate into "another sniping match", this seems rather odd behaviour, as does the deliberate ignoring of other peoples' arguments: it all but guarantees bad faith. I'm perfectly happy to discuss facts, and indeed opinions. Lazy smears and insinuations are not on.

Incidentally, you are also putting me in a particular camp. I've not done so with you, not indeed Eurosafe. I've merely pointed out troubling deficiencies in their conclusions. (I haven't commented about the skiiing side of things because I know far too little to make a meaningful contribution.)

I will PM you.

edit : But on a couple of points concerning others

I don't understand your point on @swansonj - I read his post, liked it and subsequently thanked him for making it. There might have been other people with insights still to post - indeed @srw did so. I don't always feel it is necessary to respond - there was nothing I had to add, nothing I took issue with and just saying "thanks for your contribution all the time" seems odd to me.

I don't think I'm deliberately ignoring anyone - if anyone else has asked me a question I should answer, please let me know.

I have asked a couple of direct questions of people without response. It is no big deal. If anything, the lack of response serves my purpose.

 

[theclaud]

MOD EDIT - Deleted Quote removed


Fab's "give it a rest" suggestion seems to be working on the other thread. May I suggest rolling it out across the board?

 

[ufkacbln]

Trust me - he won't.

I'm relying on that - hence the marker

 

[Linford]

Linford is lying and needs to accept this or not... this is a single post that he can answer or avoid - his choice

It serves as a marker I can refer to if he repeats these lies in future

Don't worry - my work here is done!

You aren't happy that the debate has been cooled on the other thread so you come and make accusations on here.

Now did you or did you not post this in regard to your hope that a bus driver was wearing a thudguard in this thread ?

http://www.cyclechat.net/threads/helmets.72844/post-1335304

You don't get many 2 year old bus drivers, so one assumes you know something everyone else doesn't about their range of headgear.

Now give it a rest ...you have posted far too many times about this device to claim anything less than total support for the efficacy of protective headgear

@Adrian & @theclaud ...you've already been warned by the management recently about trolling me....you are posting on this thread for no other reason than that.. how about you find someone else to harrass ? . Heaven forbid that the mods might be watching this....

 

[theclaud]

You aren't happy that the debate has been cooled on the other thread so you come and make accusations on here.

Now did you or did you not post this in regard to your hope that a bus driver was wearing a thudguard in this thread ?

http://www.cyclechat.net/threads/helmets.72844/post-1335304

You don't get many 2 year old bus drivers, so one assumes you know something everyone else doesn't about their range of headgear.

Now give it a rest you mong...you have posted far too many thimes about this device to claim anything less than total support for the efficacy of protective headgear

@Adrian & @theclaud ...you've already been warned by the management recently about trolling me....you are posting on this thread for no other reason than that.. how about you find someone else to harrass ? . Heaven forbid that the mods might be watching this....

"Mong"? Srsly?

 

[ufkacbln]

You aren't happy that the debate has been cooled on the other thread so you come and make accusations on here.

Now did you or did you not post this in regard to your hope that a bus driver was wearing a thudguard in this thread ?

http://www.cyclechat.net/threads/helmets.72844/post-1335304

You don't get many 2 year old bus drivers, so one assumes you know something everyone else doesn't about their range of headgear.

Now give it a rest you mong...you have posted far too many thimes about this device to claim anything less than total support for the efficacy of protective headgear

@Adrian & @theclaud ...you've already been warned by the management recently about trolling me....you are posting on this thread for no other reason than that.. how about you find someone else to harrass ? . Heaven forbid that the mods might be watching this....

Even for you the reference to the disabled is low and unacceptable.

Personal insults are your standard but in this case you are simply being offensive. Downs syndrome is not a joke, and your post is unacceptable by any normal standard


Please remove "Mong" from this post or it will be flagged as offensive
Mod edit: deleted for him...

 

[ufkacbln]

Mod edit: deleted for him...

Mods - thank you

 

[ufkacbln]

You aren't happy that the debate has been cooled on the other thread so you come and make accusations on here.

Now did you or did you not post this in regard to your hope that a bus driver was wearing a thudguard in this thread ?

http://www.cyclechat.net/threads/helmets.72844/post-1335304

You don't get many 2 year old bus drivers, so one assumes you know something everyone else doesn't about their range of headgear.

Now give it a rest ...you have posted far too many thimes about this device to claim anything less than total support for the efficacy of protective headgear

So that is the unequivocal evidence, a single post taken entirely out of context?

Folks - Please take up Linford's link and assess this "Evidence" of my advocating Thudguards to be used by adults for yourselves.

As I said the whole point here was to set up a marker that establishes the veracity of Linford's absurd claims and that has been successful

@Adrian & @theclaud ...you've already been warned by the management recently about trolling me....you are posting on this thread for no other reason than that.. how about you find someone else to harrass ? . Heaven forbid that the mods might be watching this....

Ironic really

 

[sazzaa]

Yawn.

 

[Scoosh]

Closing Time.

If you are unable to restrain yourselves from posting personal attacks - the Mods will assist you.